From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755685AbbBCLTJ (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 3 Feb 2015 06:19:09 -0500
Received: from mail-wg0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:53412 "EHLO
	mail-wg0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752740AbbBCLTF (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 3 Feb 2015 06:19:05 -0500
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2015 12:18:59 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
        Bruno =?iso-8859-1?Q?Pr=E9mont?= <bonbons@linux-vserver.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ilya Dryomov <ilya.dryomov@inktank.com>,
        Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>,
        Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Linux 3.19-rc5
Message-ID: <20150203111859.GA2511@gmail.com>
References: <CA+55aFxNk9OCXz7nvKXpRBc0Z85NLXPNkRm1yJf4-KAGB4pHRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1421878320.4903.17.camel@stgolabs.net>
 <54C02E08.4080405@hurleysoftware.com>
 <1861286.x5DC37NGWz@vostro.rjw.lan>
 <CA+55aFzWGCO16v3NL7SqgBnQQrwpwCTvFZR=+3x89Hg0KzJtxg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+55aFxYo1fpVoGVXhA0VPNAKKEZPAQDpF47pk+yPSnArvDEdA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150131094811.GC32343@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150131094811.GC32343@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 05:25:07PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > PeterZ, please don't make "debugging" patches like this. Ever 
> > again. Because this was just stupid, and it took me too long 
> > to realize that despite the warning being shut up, the debug 
> > patch was still actively doing bad bad things.
> 
> Understood.

It was my fault too - I should have realized this side effect of 
the new debugging facility when I merged it, which side effect, 
as Linus pointed it out, is a really bad idea.

We are generally pretty good at doing transparent debugging in 
the scheduler and in the locking code, but screwed up this time 
around :-(

Thanks,

	Ingo